Mullins v. Bank of America Corp.

Filing 7

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 4 Complaint filed by James R Mullins, Jr. - It is respectfully recommended that this case be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution and failure to comply with the Courts Order Objections to R&R due by 6/4/2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 05/17/12. (pb1)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
JAMES R. MULLINS, JR.,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 3:12-cv-131
District Judge Timothy S. Black
Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz

-vs:
BANK OF AMERICA CORP.,
Defendant.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This case is a purported removal to federal court of an action pending in the Common Pleas
Court of Preble County, Ohio. James R. Mullins, Jr., who lists himself as Plaintiff in this case,
purports to be one of the Defendants in the Preble County case.
Upon initial review of the case, the Magistrate Judge ordered Mr. Mullins to perform
various acts needed to conform to the removal procedure statute (Doc. No. 5). According to the
docket, none of those acts has been performed. That is, Mr. Mullins has not obtained the consent
of all Defendants in the state court case to removal, he has not filed in this Court copies of all the
process served on him in the state court proceedings, and he has not certified to this Court that he
has notified the Preble County Common Pleas Court that his notice to him that this case was
removed as of April 26, 2012, was incorrect.
It appears to this Court that Mr. Mullins may be attempting to use this Court’s process to
improperly impede the process of the Preble County Common Pleas Court. To prevent that abuse
of this Court and because he has not complied with the Order of May 1, 2012, it is

respectfully recommended that this case be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution
and failure to comply with the Court’s Order.

May 17, 2012.
s/ Michael R. Merz
United States Magistrate Judge

NOTICE REGARDING OBJECTIONS
Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written objections to
the proposed findings and recommendations within fourteen days after being served with this
Report and Recommendations. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(e), this period is automatically
extended to seventeen days because this Report is being served by one of the methods of service
listed in Fed.R.Civ.P. 5(b)(2)(B), (C), or (D) and may be extended further by the Court on timely
motion for an extension. Such objections shall specify the portions of the Report objected to and
shall be accompanied by a memorandum in support of the objections. If the Report and
Recommendations are based in whole or in part upon matters occurring of record at an oral
hearing, the objecting party shall promptly arrange for the transcription of the record, or such
portions of it as all parties may agree upon or the Magistrate Judge deems sufficient, unless the
assigned District Judge otherwise directs. A party may respond to another party’s objections
within fourteen days after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to make objections in
accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See, United States v. Walters, 638
F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985).